Quote of the Day: “Facts do not speak for themselves. They speak for or against competing theories. Facts divorced from theories or visions are mere isolated curiosities.” Thomas Sowell
On the Front Page today, Liz Monteiro tells us about the $1.9 Billion Regional Budget and shares some insights on how council members voted. Good summary. And on Page A4, she lists the major areas where this $1.9 Billion is going. What struck me was the vast amount of money spent on just a few line items. For example, $163 Million is going for housing and homelessness initiatives; and $240 Million for transit; and $36 Million on climate change initiatives. Since there are about 635,000 in the Region, this means that for every man, woman and child, $257 was spent on housing people and a whopping $378 was spent on transit like the $1.5 Billion Ion boondoggle. Pathetic. This is how Waterloo Region is fast becoming tax and spend Toronto. Brutal.
Also on the Front Page, I see that after spending $163 Million for housing and homelessness initiatives, the tent city at Weber and Victoria Streets has a rat problem. Why? Can one of the reasons be that if you live in a tent on land you don’t own, you really don’t care about the environment around you? Just asking…
Interesting Editorial on the Opinion Page today where the writers criticize Trudeau for his lame response to Chinese interference in the 2021 election. Good for them. Interesting comment: “…that China has been meddling in a host of indirect ways designed to swing public opinion in its favour and affect the outcome in some specific places. Oh, and that are often illegal to boot. To that the government has offered no convincing reply. On the contrary, it seems remarkably complacent about the latest information, contained in internal documents prepared by the Canadian Security Intelligence Service (CSIS) and reported by the Globe and Mail.” Worrisome.
Also on the Opinion Page today, Susan Delacourt has an article on how Trudeau is attempting to use the horrible spectre of the ghost of Donald Trump being manifest as Pierre Poilievre. Good column, I guess. At least she didn’t slag Poilievre too badly.
It’s no secret that Pierre Poilievre has mentioned many times that as Prime Minister, he will defund the CBC saving the taxpayers of Canada around $1.5 Billion a year. Why? As he has stated, he doesn’t believe that Canada should own a broadcasting company that competes with other private broadcasters. Of course, the CBC being a crown corporation is completely inept and all ratings show this. Except for sporting events (which other networks can easily produce), CBC programs are almost never in the top 25 shows in Canada. Week after week, reruns of The Big Bang Theory and Seinfeld destroy “original” programming on the CBC. No one in Canada except for a dozen of so households watch this pathetic excuse for a network. All you have to do is to tune into a few minutes of any Rosemary Barton Live program to understand why this is true. So defunding them seems completely reasonable to me. Of course, knowing that their jobs are on the line, every last CBC “journalist” has taken a very negative stance towards Conservatives in general and Poilievre specifically. Naturally, Poilievre hasn’t been too kind to CBC reporters and is currently not taking questions from them. And why should he? There are many real journalists in Canada that he doesn’t need to deal with the gotcha questions from the CBC. Robin Sears on the Opinion Page today, clearly doesn’t like this approach by Poilievre. He tells us that “…universal tool of demagogues is to demonize and threaten journalists”. He suggests that: “This is a very dark hole that Poilievre is taking his party down. Threats and even attacks on journalists are on the rise in many countries. Mexico set up special protection for some famous journalists as a result of its epidemic of murdered reporters.” Wow – not taking questions from a CBC reporter is somehow the first step to “murdered reporters”, I guess. Who knew? But Sears has a very interesting but quite unintentional statement when he says: “Choosing which news organizations to grant exclusives to, or which reporters to grant special access to, is a time-honoured tool of governments attempting to ensure their spin on issues receives wide and favourable coverage. Banning reporters or attempting to create your own lapdog media organizations is practically unheard of in Canada.” Pardon??? Didn’t Susan Delacourt brag a few weeks back about her exclusive interviews with Trudeau? And didn’t Trudeau dump $600 Million of borrowed taxpayers money to some favoured newspaper chains? And isn’t Bill C-18 just simple blackmail that benefits favoured newspaper chains? Maybe this is the real reason that I can’t find one favourable op-ed, Editorial or Editorial Cartoon from a TorStar controlled paper that is even neutral in its treatment of Pierre Poilievre.
On the Insights Page today, when I read the headline: “Our collective insanity on climate change continues” I thought – finally, someone with an ounce of sense about how our governments are attempting to bankrupt and drive us back to the 17th century with this Climate Change junk science. But no, the op-ed is by Wayne Poole. Standard Chicken Little stuff from Mr. Poole. But his second last sentence in his drivel was interesting: “We seem to be immune to the warnings and exhortations of our climate scientists as we continue to burn fossil fuels, watch greenhouse gas levels and temperatures climb, experience worsening droughts and floods, food shortages and the swelling ranks of climate refugees.” Really? So we are experiencing “worsening droughts and floods [and] food shortages” are we? Nonsense. My friend Mr. Google tells me that this paper here: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0022169415008744 states that: “No significant precipitation change from 1850 to present.” And this paper here: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9588423/ tells us that: “There is a ‘statistically significant decline of the percentage of land area affected by drought conditions’ based on rainfall measures from 1950–2020” or in other words, less drought!!! And I’m not going to go through the thousands of articles that contradict Poole’s belief that there are “food shortages”, but if you want, just drop over to: https://www.humanprogress.org/topic/food-hunger/ and read a couple of hundred of them… Why does TheRecord publish such trash? Yes, it’s an op-ed, but still…